Acute Mechanical Performance of Magmaris vs. DESolve Bioresorbable Scaffolds in a Real-World Scenario

Background: After the bioresorbable PLLA-based vascular scaffold (Absorb BVS) was taken from the market due to its high adverse event rates, a magnesium-based scaffold (Magmaris) was introduced.Objective: To compare the acute performance of the sirolimus-eluting magnesium alloy Magmaris scaffold with that of the novolimus-eluting PLLA-based DESolve scaffold in terms of appropriate scaffold deployment using optical coherence tomography (OCT).Methods and Results: Data from the final OCT pullback of 98 patients were included (19 Magmaris, 79 DESolve) and analyzed at 1-mm intervals. The following indices were calculated: mean and minimal area, residual area stenosis, incomplete strut apposition, tissue prolapse, eccentricity index, symmetry index, strut fracture, and edge dissection. OCT showed a minimum lumen area for Magmaris vs. DESolve of 6.6 ± 1.6 vs. 6.0 ± 1.9 (p = 0.06). Scaffolds with residual area stenosis >20% were predominantly seen in the DESolve group (15.8 vs. 46.8%; p = 0.01). The mean eccentricity index did differ significantly (0.74 ± 0.06 vs. 0.63 ± 0.09; p < 0.001). No fractures were observed for Magmaris scaffolds, but 15.2% were documented for DESolve BRS (p < 0.001). Incomplete scaffold apposition area was significantly higher in the DESolve group (0.01 ± 0.02 vs. 1.05 ± 2.32 mm2; p < 0.001).Conclusion: This is the first study to compare the acute mechanical performance between Magmaris and DESolve in a real-world setting. The acute mechanical performance of Magmaris BRS seems to be superior to that of DESolve BRS, whereas OCT showed a good acute mechanical performance for both BRS in terms of generally accepted imaging criteria.

Mid-term outcomes of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold in patients with below-the-knee arterial disease: A pooled analysis of individual patient data

Previous studies on everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) have shown promising 1-year primary patency rates in infrapopliteal arteries. Literature from large cohorts on long-term outcomes with the infrapopliteal Absorb BVS (Abbott Vascular) is lacking. The aim of this study is to pool published and unpublished data to provide a more precise estimate of the 24-month outcomes of Absorb BVS for the treatment of infrapopliteal disease. For the pooled analysis, updated original and newly collected data from three cohorts on treatment with the Absorb BVS for de novo infrapopliteal lesions were combined. The primary endpoint was freedom from restenosis. Secondary endpoints were freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR), major amputation and survival. The pooled analysis included a total of 121 patients with 161 lesions, treated with 189 Absorb BVS in 126 limbs. The mean age of the patients was 73 years, 57% had diabetes mellitus, and 75% were classified as Rutherford–Becker class 5 or 6. Of the 161 lesions, 101 (63%) were calcified and 36 (22%) were occlusions. Successful deployment was achieved with all scaffolds. Freedom from restenosis was 91.7% and 86.6% at 12 and 24 months, respectively, and freedom from CD-TLR was 97.2% and 96.6%. Major amputation occurred in 1.6% of the limbs. Overall survival was 85% at 24 months. In conclusion, this pooled analysis represents the largest reported analysis of mid-term results of the Absorb BVS for the management of chronic limb-threatening ischemia. At 24 months, the Absorb BVS was safe with promising clinical outcomes for the treatment of infrapopliteal disease.

Major adverse cardiovascular events after implantation of absorb bioresorbable scaffold: One-year clinical outcomes

Background/Aim: Bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) represents a novel generation of intracoronary devices designed to be fully resorbed after healing of the stented lesion, delivering antiproliferative drug to suppress restenosis, providing adequate diameter of the coronary vessel and preserving the vascular endothelial function. It was supposed that BVS will reduce neointimal proliferation and that their late bioresorption will reduce the negative effects of traditional drug-eluting stents, including the late stent thrombosis, local vessel wall inflammation, loss of coronary vasoreactivity and the need for the long-term dual antiplatelet therapy. The purpose of this research was to investigate efficacy and safety of Absorb everolimus-eluting BVS implantation and the prevalence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at the mid-term follow-up. Methods: The study encompassed 42 patients selected for BVS implantation and fulfilling inclusion criteria - 37 male and 5 female - admitted to the Dedinje Cardiovascular Institute, Belgrade, Serbia over the one-year period (from January 2015 to January 2016) for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Coronary vessel patency before and after stenting was assessed by the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow (TIMI) grades. After the index PCI procedure with BVS all patients were clinically followed by regular (prescheduled or event-driven) visits during the next 12-month period. Results: In the intention-to-treat analysis, all Absorb BVS procedures were successful, without the need for conversion to other treatment modalities. The complete reperfusion (TIMI flow grade 3) after the intervention was established in 97.6 % of patients and 100 % of them achieved the TIMI flow grade ≥ 2. The presence of angina pectoris was reduced significantly by the BVS procedure: stable angina 57.1 % to 11.9 %, (p < 0.001) and unstable angina 31 % to 0 %, respectively (p < 0.001). After the one-year follow-up, the MACE rate was 11.9 %. Myocardial infarction occurred in 4.8 % and the need for PCI reintervention in 2.4 % of cases (not influenced by the gender or the age of patients). There were 4 cases of death (all patients were older and had lower values of left ventricular ejection fraction). Conclusion: The results of the current research demonstrated a high interventional success rate of the Absorb BVS implantation, followed by the early improvement of the anginal status. However, that was not translated into the favourable mid-term clinical outcomes, opening debate about the current status of Absorb BVS and the need for future refinements of stent design and implantation techniques.

Pre-Emptive OCT-Guided Angioplasty of Vulnerable Intermediate Coronary Lesions: Results from the Prematurely Halted PECTUS-Trial

Objectives. To assess the safety and efficacy of pre-emptive treatment of optical coherence tomography- (OCT-) derived vulnerable, non-flow-limiting, non-culprit lesions in patients with myocardial infarction (MI). Background. Intracoronary imaging with OCT can aid in the decision to treat non-flow-limiting lesions by identifying vulnerable plaques. Pre-emptive treatment of these lesions might improve patient outcome by “sealing” these plaques. Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) have theoretical benefit for this treatment because they dissolve completely over time. Methods. In patients presenting with MI, non-culprit lesions with a fractional flow reserve ≥0.8 were imaged with OCT. Vulnerable plaques were randomised to either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) placement or optimal medicinal therapy (OMT). The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, non-fatal MI, and unplanned revascularisation at 1-year follow-up. Results. The trial was stopped prematurely after retraction from the market of the Absorb BVS. At that time, a total of 34 patients were randomised. At two years, the composite endpoint occurred 3 times (18.8%) in the BVS group and 1 time (6.3%) in the OMT group. Apart from one elective PCI for stable angina in the OMT group, no target lesions in any group were revascularised. Conclusions. Pre-emptive stenting of vulnerable plaques had no evident benefit compared to conservative treatment. However, due to the low number of included patients, no definite conclusions could be drawn. Identifying and potentially treating vulnerable plaques remains an important target for future research. This trial is registered under https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/NL4177 on 08-12-2015.

Everolimus-eluting bioresorbablecoronary scaffold in Asian patients; a 2-yearfollow-up

Indo-Pakistan population has one of the highest risk of coronary artery disease(CAD) in the world.1Percutaneous interventions with the use of stents has been the mainstay of treatment for CAD, evolving from balloon angioplasty to bare metal stents and then to drug eluting stents. However, there are a few drawbacks related to the metal implant in the coronary, leading to the development of bio-resorbable vascular scaffolds(BVS). This case series studies the implantation techniques and 24 month clinical outcome of bioresorbable stent Absorb at Rawalpindi Institute of Cardiology. From November 1, 2013 till June 30, 2018. Fifty patients undergoing angioplasty with Absorb BVS as elective or primary PCI were enrolled. Case selection was at the discretion of the operator. Patients were followed up clinically. Repeat angiogram was conducted if clinically indicated. Continuous...

Two-year clinical performance of Absorb BVS compared to Xience EES in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a pooled analysis of AIDA and COMPARE-ABSORB trials

Introduction Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) use appears theoretically attractive in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) as acute lesions are generally composed of soft plaques, in which optimal BVS deployment and expansion is easier to achieve. Furthermore, those patients are generally younger and would benefit longer from the promise of vascular restoration therapy. Purpose In this patient level pooled analysis of two clinical trials, we evaluated the clinical outcomes of Absorb BVS versus Xience everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in STEMI patients at 2-year follow-up. Methods We performed an individual patient-level pooled analysis of the AIDA and COMPARE-ABSORB trials in which 3515 patient were randomly assigned to Absorb BVS (n=1772) or Xience EES (n=1743). Clinical outcomes in STEMI patients were analyzed by randomized treatment assignment cumulative through 2 years. The primary efficacy outcomes measure was target lesion failure (cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction or target lesion revascularization), and the primary safety outcome measure was device thrombosis at 2-year follow-up. Results 350 (19.8%) STEMI patients were allocated to Absorb BVS versus 328 (18.8%) to Xience EES. The mean age of patient presenting with STEMI was 60 years old, 76.0% were males and 15.3% had diabetes mellitus. At 2-years target lesion failure occurred in 8.4% of BVS STEMI patients and 6.2% of EES STEMI patients (p=0.253). The 2-year rates of cardiac death (2.6% vs 1.6%, p=0.332), TV-MI (4.7% vs 2.5%) and TLR (6.8% vs 4.1%) were not significantly different. The 2-year incidence of definite device thrombosis was 4.7% in Absorb BVS versus 1.8% in Xience EES (p=0.045). Conclusion In the present patient-level pooled analysis of the AIDA and COMPARE-Absorb trials, BVS was associated with increased rates of device thrombosis in STEMI patients compared to Xience EES. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Private company. Main funding source(s): Abbott